ZAHUR TEXTILE MILLS and 2 others vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance and 3 others
This matter arises from a petition where the petitioners contended that no authoritative decision exists from the Supreme Court regarding the interpretation of Clause (4-B) of Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, inserted by P.O. No. 14 of 1985, concerning the extension of stay orders beyond the stipulated time when a High Court is unable to dispose of a matter for valid reasons. The core legal question involves the proper interpretation of this constitutional provision regarding interim stays. The Supreme Court held that the contention raises a question of public importance and of an academic nature, and consequently granted leave to appeal for the examination of the said contention. The Court laid down that interpretation of constitutional provisions regarding the extension of stay orders beyond stipulated timeframes requires authoritative adjudication by the apex court.
- Whether a stay order can be extended beyond the stipulated time under Clause (4-B) of Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 if the High Court is unable to dispose of the matter for valid reasons?
- Does the interpretation of Clause (4-B) of Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 constitute a question of public importance and academic nature warranting leave to appeal?
- Article 199, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' SAJJAD ALI SHAH, C.J.---Contention of Raja Muhammad Akram, learned counsel for the petitioners, is that there is no authoritative decision from this Court on the interpretation of Clause (4-B), which has been inserted in Article 199 of the Constitution by P.O. No,14 of 1985, which on perusal, seemingly, indicates that if High Court is unable to dispose of a matter within the stipulated time, for which there are valid reasons, then stay can be extended beyond the stipulated time.
2. Since there is no authoritative decision from this Court on the interpretation of the provision mentioned above and stay application has been withdrawn by the learned counsel for the petitioners and it is a question of public importance and a academic nature, we grant leave for examination of the contention mentioned above. By consent of the learned counsel appearing for both the sides, these appeals may be fixed for hearing before Bench of two Judges, since the impugned order is passed by one Judge of the High Court, during the vacation when such Bench is available at Islamabad.
Cited by 1 case
- Ahmed Bakhsh vs Ghulam Hussain Etc. 2008 KLR Revenue Cases 73